Practical approach for comparative analysis of multilesion molecular imaging using a semiautomated program for PET/CT

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 52, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1727-1732

  Fox, Josef J ^a   Autran Blanc, Estelle ^b   Morris, Michael J ^a   Gavane, Somali ^a   Nehmeh, Sadek ^a   Van Nuffel, André ^c   Gönen, Mithat ^a   Schöder, Heiko ^a   Humm, John L ^c   Scher, Howard I ^a   Larson, Steven M ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b Cochin Hospital ^*  (France)

^c General Electric Healthcare   (Belgium)

Author keywords

18F FDG; 18F FDHT; Molecular imaging; PET CT; Semi automated

Indexed keywords

16BETA FLUORO 5 DIHYDROTESTOSTERONE F 18; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ARTICLE; CASTRATION RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; MALE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARDIZATION; TISSUE SPECIFICITY; TUMOR VOLUME;

AUTOMATION; DIHYDROTESTOSTERONE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; ORCHIECTOMY; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REFERENCE STANDARDS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 80455168438     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.111.089326     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Kelloff GJ, Hoffman JM, Johnson B, et al. Progress and promise of FDG-PET imaging for cancer patient management and oncologic drug development. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:2785-2808. (Pubitemid 40525178)
2. 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1059-1066.
3. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell. 2000;100:57-70. (Pubitemid 30046295)
4. Larson SM, Schoder H. New PET tracers for evaluation of solid tumor response to therapy. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;53:158-166.
5. Erdi YE, Mawlawi O, Larson SM, et al. Segmentation of lung lesion volume by adaptive positron emission tomography image thresholding. Cancer. 1997;80 (suppl)2505-2509. (Pubitemid 28009506)
6. Erdi YE, Srivastava NC, Humm JL, Larson SM. A coordinate system for tumor identification in positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. Clin Positron Imaging. 2000;3:131-136.
7. 18F-FDG in patients with progressive, metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:366-373.
8. Lin LI. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 1989;45:255-268.
9. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(suppl 1):122S-150S.
10. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228-247.
11. Schwartz LH, Mazumdar M, Brown W, Smith A, Panicek DM. Variability in response assessment in solid tumors: effect of number of lesions chosen for measurement. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:4318-4323. (Pubitemid 37248386)
12. Hillman SL, An MW, O'Connell MJ, et al. Evaluation of the optimal number of lesions needed for tumor evaluation using the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group investigation. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3205-3210.
13. Darkeh MH, Suzuki C, Torkzad MR. The minimum number of target lesions that need to be measured to be representative of the total number of target lesions (according to RECIST). Br J Radiol. 2009;82:681-686.
14. Moskowitz CS, Jia X, Schwartz LH, Gonen M. A simulation study to evaluate the impact of the number of lesions measured on response assessment. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:300-310.
15. Abujudeh HH, Boland GW, Kaewlai R, et al. Abdominal and pelvic computed tomography (CT) interpretation: discrepancy rates among experienced radiologists. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:1952-1957.
16. 18F-FDG PET and CT measurements of tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1760-1769.